NDP to back Conservative motion calling for carbon tax pause on all home heating fuels

Queenmandy85 · November 5, 2023

15 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I guess you were part of that 'uneducated electorate' you mentioned? How very self aware.

You are correct. I took military history, which, while very entertaining, has nothing to do with the important issues we face. Therefore, I listen to people who are educated, ie. physicists, chemists, virologists geographers and biologists. I can expound at length on the Sukhomlinov Effect, or why people who lived in northern Europe suddenly needed to move south, across the Roman frontier and why the Roman Legions were suddenly unable to resist the incursion. Whoopee.

When a climatologist with decades of research behind him, says the rapid build up of greenhouse gases is going to cause the global climate to heat up faster than natural processes can adapt, I take note. When most other experienced climatologists say the same thing, with further support from physicists, I listen. When Steven Hawking says all these scientists are correct, I'm sold. They know what they are talking about. Some lawyer or unknown person on the internet tells me something to the contrary, who am I supposed to believe?

The climate change deniers are worried about the economy. What king of economy are people going to have when the global temperature is 15 degrees C warmer and climbing?

The carbon tax was brought in to encourage people to listen to what is coming and act. Unfortunately, there are always people trying to sell a book saying the smartest people, the people who actually know what they are talking about, are just a bunch of "lefties." Sorry, but you are telling me, a life long conservative activist, that all the smart people are leftists. So, are you suggesting conservatives are stupid? That is what it sounds like.

I disagree.

By the way, the price of gas has dropped from $1.74 to $1.42 since the summer.

CdnFox · November 5, 2023

10 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

You are correct. I took military history, which, while very entertaining, has nothing to do with the important issues we face. Therefore, I listen to people who are educated, ie. physicists, chemists, virologists geographers and biologists. I can expound at length on the Sukhomlinov Effect, or why people who lived in northern Europe suddenly needed to move south, across the Roman frontier and why the Roman Legions were suddenly unable to resist the incursion. Whoopee.

Yet you couldn't figure out why a carbon tax wouldn't do any good to address the issue? Well.... i guess that shows the danger of relying on experts for all your thinking.

11 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

When a climatologist with decades of research behind him, says the rapid build up of greenhouse gases is going to cause the global climate to heat up faster than natural processes can adapt, I take note. When most other experienced climatologists say the same thing, with further support from physicists, I listen.

And apparently don't care. If you cared, you wouldn't be supporting a carbon tax or a party that proposed it as their 'solution'.

I hear it and tend to believe there's a concern as well - but i look at what could practically be done. And a carbon tax isn't it.

12 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The climate change deniers are worried about the economy.

if so then they are far far smarter and more concerned about it than the climate zealots.

It's a simple fact - solving climate change is an economic issue, not a scientific one. That's pretty easy to see.

13 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The carbon tax was brought in to encourage people to listen to what is coming and act.

The carbon tax was brought in to raise money for the libs (federally). Provincially it raised money for bc where it was first introduced.

it had no chance of fighting climate change in any way at all that was remotely meaningful or relevant in the slighest.

15 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

By the way, the price of gas has dropped from $1.74 to $1.42 since the summer.

Oh i guess we solved climate change then. You're an 1diot.

IF you don't take climate change seriously - why on earth should I?

Queenmandy85 · November 5, 2023

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

IF you don't take climate change seriously - why on earth should I?

Don't be so gloomy. In twenty-four months we will have a new Prime Minister and no carbon tax to drag you down.

On the other hand, we will still have to pay our taxes. It costs money to run a government.

I'm sure I must have said something you misconstrued to give you the impression I believed a tax on fossil fuels would solve climate change on it's own.What I did say is we have to stop burning coal and oil. If we raised the carbon tax to $25 a litre, it would have an effect. It still wouldn't be what oil and coal are actually worth over the long term, but it would force us to look at the viable alternatives. We can get off carbon with the technology and capital we have now, and be even more prosperous, but we are leaving it too late.

I get the impression you, have no appreciation of what global warming will mean to future generations.

Edited November 5, 2023 by Queenmandy85

Queenmandy85 · November 5, 2023

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

If you cared, you wouldn't be supporting a carbon tax or a party that proposed it as their 'solution'.

What can we do to get people to stop burning coal, natural gas and oil?

I will admit, Pierre Poilievre is a lot more intelligent than I initially gave him credit for. My experience growing up in BC is that a Socred with intelligence would have been a novelty if one actually existed. Mr. Poilievre appears to be the exception. Now, if he can survive the socreds in his caucus, he shows every sign of being a success. He has a bumpy road ahead and I wish him well.

PS. As I said earlier, I remenber how the GST was a big issue in the election. The Tories brought it in and the Grits promised to get rid of it. Guess what. The grits won. Guess what else. We still have the GST.

In BC, the NDP brought in Government insurance. The Socreds campaigned for a full year before the election against ICBC. I ran as a Tory in that election. The Socreds won. They didn't get rid of ICBC. They doubled the rates.

Now, I am sure Mr. Poilievre will get rid of the carbon tax, but I wouldn't bet money on it.

Edited November 5, 2023 by Queenmandy85

Legato · November 5, 2023

24 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

We can get off carbon with the technology and capital we have now, and be even more prosperous, but we are leaving it too late.

I

What effective technology would that be. Please don't bring up solar or wind. They are about as carbon neutral as an anthracite and lignite topped pizza.

blackbird · November 5, 2023

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

When a climatologist with decades of research behind him, says the rapid build up of greenhouse gases is going to cause the global climate to heat up faster than natural processes can adapt, I take note. When most other experienced climatologists say the same thing, with further support from physicists, I listen.

No research has proven that man is the cause of climate change. You seem so adamant and believe everything you-ve read. So why don't you give the basic research and proven facts that demonstrate man is causing climate change. I am waiting.

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

When Steven Hawking says all these scientists are correct, I'm sold.

So you take the word of a prominent atheist who denies God exists and created the universe; someone who is a highly recognized theoretical scientist I assume, but has absolutely no credible explanation of where the universe came from.

Steven Hawking was not a researcher of climate science. He did no research himself on it as far as I know. He was a theoretical physicist and cosmologist. I will say he had 50 years of struggle with motor neurone disease which was difficult. Yet you "are sold" simply because he says something. Interesting.

I would believe 99.999999% of people are like you and simply belief something because the media or some politician says it is a fact. None of the climate alarmism believers have any clue about what proof there is or lack thereof, but they just believe it because somebody in media or political world says so over and over again. That is called manipulation or propagandizing.

Edited November 5, 2023 by blackbird

Queenmandy85 · November 5, 2023

51 minutes ago, Legato said:

What effective technology would that be. Please don't bring up solar or wind. They are about as carbon neutral as an anthracite and lignite topped pizza.

No, nuclear power. Western Canada is the Saudi Arabia of uranium.

Legato · November 5, 2023

14 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

No, nuclear power. Western Canada is the Saudi Arabia of uranium.

Nuclear power would be good, if one was able to convince the eco-warriors.

blackbird · November 5, 2023

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

What can we do to get people to stop burning coal, natural gas and oil?

I lived in northwest B.C. for 27 years and had a natural gas furnace. The monthly bill in the winter was around $300 or $350 including carbon taxes. I kept my receipts at that time and from 2008 to 2016, I paid about $300 per year in carbon taxes and I don't believe there was any rebate.

That is a significant amount of money for a retired person. I don't believe it made any difference to CO2 emissions or climate change. It was nothing more than a scam tax. B.C. was one of the first in the world if not the first to impose carbon taxes on its citizens. They had no feeling for people. I doubt I will ever vote for the BC Liberals (now BC United Party) or the NDP. But my vote is next to worthless. B.C. is full of left winger woke, tree huggers and such.

blackbird · November 5, 2023

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

We can get off carbon with the technology and capital we have now,

You realize the natural gas industry is a major industry in B.C. and a new pipeline to the coast is now being completed so we can ship natural gas to the rest of the world.

Do you really want to stop natural gas production and use? It is a very clean-burning fuel and generates a lot of heat. Why kill a major industry such as natural gas when the province can earn hundreds of millions of dollars in royalty revenue and thousands of good-paying jobs for Canadians? We will also be capable to selling it countries like China which presently are building more coal-fired generating plants. Natural gas is much cleaner and more efficient.

First nations bands along the pipeline route will also benefit from the pipeline. That's why they support it.

CdnFox · November 5, 2023

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

What can we do to get people to stop burning coal, natural gas and oil?

Same thing we did to get people off riding horses and burning wood - invent better tech that's more desirable to use.

We're close, but we're not there.

Quote

I will admit, Pierre Poilievre is a lot more intelligent than I initially gave him credit for. My experience growing up in BC is that a Socred with intelligence would have been a novelty if one actually existed. Mr. Poilievre appears to be the exception. Now, if he can survive the socreds in his caucus, he shows every sign of being a success. He has a bumpy road ahead and I wish him well.

There were lots of intelligent socreds. Again and again you seem to be driven less by facts reason or logic than by "muh feels". I assume you grew up on the island? That would explain a few things. But thinking people usually don't make those kinds of comments.

Quote

PS. As I said earlier, I remenber how the GST was a big issue in the election. The Tories brought it in and the Grits promised to get rid of it. Guess what. The grits won. Guess what else. We still have the GST.

The liberal leaders are liars and always have been. Chretien has been quoted saying as much , noting "you always go to the conferences and you always promise but you never do anything about it" referring to climate change. Chretien, both trudeaus, martin - they were all classic 'politicians' who said what people wanted to hear then ignored the people when they got into power.

Quote

Now, I am sure Mr. Poilievre will get rid of the carbon tax, but I wouldn't bet money on it.

Well i guess we'll see

Queenmandy85 · November 5, 2023

34 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Why kill a major industry such as natural gas when the province can earn hundreds of millions of dollars in royalty revenue and thousands of good-paying jobs for Canadians? We will also be capable to selling it countries like China which presently are building more coal-fired generating plants.

With nuclear power, we can electrify and rebuild the rail network. Buildling and operating power plants around the country and exporting them to every place that needs them will easily replace the thousands of jobs in the oil related industries. Place SMR's in rural areas and several Candu's around each major city. Nuclear power is even cleaner burning than natural gas. Its main carbon footprint is in the construction phase.

Thorium reactors are in developement and they have the advantage of no military application, no melt-downs and are even ten times more efficient than uranium.

This is all academic however. Prime Minister Poilievre will do what he will do. We will be impressed sometimes and disappointed other times. Governing Canada is easy until you sit in the big chair in the cabinet room for the first time and discover the true meaning of Harold MacMillain's response, "Events, dear boy, events."

At least we won't have the carbon tax much longer. ?

Queenmandy85 · November 5, 2023

17 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I assume you grew up on the island?

Lord, no. I grew up in the Kootenays. Best skiing in the world. I did go to U-Vic and worked in Victoria for a few years.

When I say "grew up," the jury is still out.

19 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The liberal leaders are liars and always have been. Chretien has been quoted saying as much , noting "you always go to the conferences and you always promise but you never do anything about it" referring to climate change. Chretien, both trudeaus, martin - they were all classic 'politicians' who said what people wanted to hear then ignored the people when they got into power.

Okay, yes you are right. Let's go with those pesky Income Trusts Mr. Harper wasn't going to tax and then he stood infront of us in Saskatchewan and promised that Saskatchewan's oil revenue would be excluded in the equalization calculations. I've been lied to many times in my job, but that one was as brazen and any slick grit promise.

But, even Justin Trudeau kept a campaign promise. But out of all the possible promises to keep, legalizing pot was the dumbest.

I'm fine with Prime Minster Poilievre cancelling the carbon tax if he comes up with a better plan.

blackbird · November 5, 2023

10 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

With nuclear power, we can electrify and rebuild the rail network. Buildling and operating power plants around the country and exporting them to every place that needs them will easily replace the thousands of jobs in the oil related industries. Place SMR's in rural areas and several Candu's around each major city. Nuclear power is even cleaner burning than natural gas. Its main carbon footprint is in the construction phase.

Thorium reactors are in developement and they have the advantage of no military application, no melt-downs and are even ten times more efficient than uranium.

This is all academic however. Prime Minister Poilievre will do what he will do. We will be impressed sometimes and disappointed other times. Governing Canada is easy until you sit in the big chair in the cabinet room for the first time and discover the true meaning of Harold MacMillain's response, "Events, dear boy, events."

At least we won't have the carbon tax much longer. ?

If nuclear power plants were a profitable business to get into, why are private companies not building them everywhere? Having government invest taxpayers money in building private businesses is not the answer. Government doing it would be disaster. They lack the knowledge and are inefficient.

So it would have to be done by private companies. It is not being done probably because private companies do not see it as profitable and there are too many hurdles to get past. Companies have to see it as a proven money-maker.

You also have government environmental hurdles to overcome. It would probably take decades to get approval to build some nuclear power plants or they would never get approved because of environmental concerns and opposition from many people. So it doesn't seem like it would be possible in the foreseeable future to have a lot of nuclear private plants. There are too many obstacles.

Queenmandy85 · November 5, 2023

That is why we should have been doing this 45 years ago.

I am struggling to be optimistic. The problem is the failure of the education system to ensure people like me go out into the world with a solid grounding in Math, Chemistry, Physics, Biology and Geography. The fact that we can vote without a basic understanding of science is going to be our biggest obstacle.

Edited November 5, 2023 by Queenmandy85

Queenmandy85 · November 5, 2023

14 minutes ago, blackbird said:

If nuclear power plants were a profitable business to get into, why are private companies not building them everywhere?

Are the Dams on the Columbia privately owned? BC Hydro is a Crown corporation. Yes, the dams on the Kootenay, between Nelson and Casltgar were built by West Kootenay Power and Light, but that was exceptional. The nuclear power plants are not profitable, but the economic spin-offs will produce a lot of revenue, particularly in the export sector. And, most importantly, how much value do you place on the lives of the unborn, those people who have not been born yet but will be impacted by our actions taken now?

suds · November 5, 2023

Great! If this goes ahead it should reduce my monthly Enbridge gas bill by about 20%. And by the way, this 'federal carbon charge' (or tax) is subject to HST.

CdnFox · November 6, 2023

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Okay, yes you are right. Let's go with those pesky Income Trusts Mr. Harper wasn't going to tax and then he stood infront of us in Saskatchewan and promised that Saskatchewan's oil revenue would be excluded in the equalization calculations.

Sure. It was painfully obvious he was honest about both when he said it, especially the income trusts. He got into power, and got a talking to by people who knew a little bit more and found out - that ain't gonna happen. He stood up in front of the whole country and said I promised this, i was wrong, i've broken my word and i'm very sorry here's why and the opposition agrees.

People make mistakes. That was a mistake. Interestingly enough those who keep track of such things found he was the prime minister who kept his word more than any other. And he delivered on the vast majority of what he promised, sometimes even trying for years. Sure there's a few things he couldn't deliver on - the courts shot him down on electing senators - tho that was a surprise to even legal experts.

There's a difference between that and lying. Chretien lied about the gst. He really didn't pretend otherwise.

Quote

But, even Justin Trudeau kept a campaign promise. But out of all the possible promises to keep, legalizing pot was the dumbest.

lol Well actually i agreed with him on that one. But that's about the only one he's kept.

Politicians are always going to make promises that they might mean when they make them but find out they can't deliver on. Especially in their first term when they haven't been in power yet. But justin's track record is about the worst.

I'm sure PP will get rid of the tax. Might not be day one like everyone's expecting, might be phased over a few years for reasonas ,but i'm sure it'll happen.

I'm sure he'll cut funding to the cbc. I'm not SURE he'll cut them off altogether - i hope he does, but if there was one he 'mostly' but not entirely delivered on, that might be it.

Queenmandy85 · November 6, 2023

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I'm sure he'll cut funding to the cbc. I'm not SURE he'll cut them off altogether - i hope he does, but if there was one he 'mostly' but not entirely delivered on, that might be it.

My MP said the plan is to maintain the French network and CBC radio, but they plan to reduce support for the English language TV network. We will be the only western nation without a publicly funded TV network. I don't understand why he would do it. Remember what happened when Mulroney just pre-empted 20 minutes of Coronation Street.

Anyway, maybe those events MacMillain warned about will distract him.

Have a good night.?

CdnFox · November 6, 2023

23 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

My MP said the plan is to maintain the French network and CBC radio, but they plan to reduce support for the English language TV network.

I've heard similar -but he may also kick quebec some funding and say here do your own or the like.

Either way if he cuts off all funding to the english side that'll be fine. If he does.

We will be the only western nation without a publicly funded TV network.

I doubt that. I suspect we'll see versions of "pbs" popping up. Funded directly by donations from the public rather than by gov't, and that's fine. The last thing we need at this point in history is a gov't funded tv network.

Quote

I don't understand why he would do it. Remember what happened when Mulroney just pre-empted 20 minutes of Coronation Street.

LOL - yeah. Or when the ubc students rioted when they took Monty Python off the air (despite it having been in reruns for years). We do sometimes get passionate about our televison

But the cbc has to go. There was a time when it might have been saved - that time is long gone. And the commercial broadcasters can divvy up the advert revenues which they need to stay alive.

Jack9000 · November 6, 2023

and the bloc leader just said hes gonna vote against it so the whole thing is pointless

herbie · November 6, 2023

22 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The fact that we can vote without a basic understanding of science is going to be our biggest obstacle.

Oh... someone else noticed.

I thought that prices doubling in 2 years even as portions shrink by one third meant I was schooled wrong and 6% inflation was correct. And watching my infant pile blocks into a pyramid was normal human development.

OftenWrong · November 6, 2023

8 minutes ago, herbie said:

And watching my infant pile blocks into a pyramid was normal human development.

Have you tried suspending a banana from above?

herbie · November 7, 2023

Too busy looking for the Ancient Aliens who are the only ones that know how to do that.

ExFlyer · November 7, 2023

Back to topic "NDP to back Conservative motion calling for carbon tax pause on all home heating fuels"

Parliamentarians had an opportunity to do something but, as usual, the Bloc, the Quebecers decided they want diddly to do with Canada and not play with the grown ups.